Bowbearer wrote:

Bacton Gas terminal in North Norfolk is converting to Hydrogen production.

I think the Government are holding back on pushing Hydrogen until the infrastructure is in place.

According to JCB storage wont be that big a problem.

Looking forward to converting my 200tdi.

Maybe why Ineos didn't launch electric? They are UKs biggest producer of Hydrogen.

Maybe I should think about an M57 conversion.

markb110 wrote:

Little known fact, when clearing the land around the Fukushima site in Japan they found an unexploded US bomb

Not entirely certain building more of those things on a tiny overcrowded island is the best of ideas.....and still no one talks of the waste apart from lets encase in concrete and leave it at the bottom of a great big hole.

Bluest wrote:

Procta wrote:

One of the lads had an LPG Audi, and he said that only one petrol station in the area, that supports it. Tbh i am very surprised that there are cars still running it, It just seemed to vanish for some reason.

My Dacia was a brand new purchase last year, factory fit LPG was a no cost option. Availability seems to be very dependent on location. Where I live and travel, East Lancs and Greater Manchester, there is loads of choice and I never pay more than 80p a litre.

Cragster69 wrote:

markb110 wrote:

Little known fact, when clearing the land around the Fukushima site in Japan they found an unexploded US bomb

Not entirely certain building more of those things on a tiny overcrowded island is the best of ideas.....and still no one talks of the waste apart from lets encase in concrete and leave it at the bottom of a great big hole.

As someone who works in the Nuclear Industry I have a level of bias. Lack of action from the UK Government has led us down the path we are currently on.

Government decisions made in the mid 90s to not pursue nuclear as part of the energy mix has compromised the UK.
The challenge of achieving 24GW (25% of the expected energy demand) by 2050, the nuclear contribution to energy supply in the UK peaked in 1995 at 25%.
Demand in 1995 was around half of that anticipated in 2050 - so we need to supply twice as much nuclear energy than the UK supplied at its peak by 2050.
Nuclear currently supplies 12-14%, but this falls away to less than 5% in 2029 when only Sizewell B will remain operational.
Even when Hinkley Point C and Sizewell B are operational we'll still only be around where we are currently due to the capacity we'll have lost between now and then.

New Nuclear was ruled out and replaced by gas which had already been used to replace coal to put those pesky Miners in their place. Gas was cheap and plentiful but it is better used for direct heating rather than electrical generation. Gas fired power stations are very inefficient, the Combined Cycle Gas Turbines are much better. But when you are reliant on gas imports it only needs a crazy dictator from a gas producing region to turn off the tap and you are left in the cold.

A better energy supply balance is needed. France have the majority of the electricity generated from nuclear but when you discover a problem in one, those of a similar design are usually shutdown to check it's not a widespread issue. You then don't have security of supply and are reliant on imports.

On the subject of waste disposal, I fully agree. I am disappointed on a daily basis that the best we can come up with is a drum full of cement and radioactive waste or a thick walled shielded container generally forged using an intensive amount of energy.
I wish we were further along than the concept of burying the waste in a hole. The Geological Disposal Facility (GDF) in the UK has been talked about for years and like the practical and sustained capture of nuclear fusion is nowhere near a reality. If it was, my job would be a whole easier. Instead we are having to plan for long term above ground storage. While Scotland has a clear Near Surface Disposal policy in place, there is no political will to enact it.

Bowbearer wrote:

According to JCB storage wont be that big a problem.

Cragster69 wrote:

markb110 wrote:

Little known fact, when clearing the land around the Fukushima site in Japan they found an unexploded US bomb

Not entirely certain building more of those things on a tiny overcrowded island is the best of ideas.....and still no one talks of the waste apart from lets encase in concrete and leave it at the bottom of a great big hole.

As someone who works in the Nuclear Industry I have a level of bias. Lack of action from the UK Government has led us down the path we are currently on.

Government decisions made in the mid 90s to not pursue nuclear as part of the energy mix has compromised the UK.
The challenge of achieving 24GW (25% of the expected energy demand) by 2050, the nuclear contribution to energy supply in the UK peaked in 1995 at 25%.
Demand in 1995 was around half of that anticipated in 2050 - so we need to supply twice as much nuclear energy than the UK supplied at its peak by 2050.
Nuclear currently supplies 12-14%, but this falls away to less than 5% in 2029 when only Sizewell B will remain operational.
Even when Hinkley Point C and Sizewell B are operational we'll still only be around where we are currently due to the capacity we'll have lost between now and then.

New Nuclear was ruled out and replaced by gas which had already been used to replace coal to put those pesky Miners in their place. Gas was cheap and plentiful but it is better used for direct heating rather than electrical generation. Gas fired power stations are very inefficient, the Combined Cycle Gas Turbines are much better. But when you are reliant on gas imports it only needs a crazy dictator from a gas producing region to turn off the tap and you are left in the cold.

A better energy supply balance is needed. France have the majority of the electricity generated from nuclear but when you discover a problem in one, those of a similar design are usually shutdown to check it's not a widespread issue. You then don't have security of supply and are reliant on imports.

On the subject of waste disposal, I fully agree. I am disappointed on a daily basis that the best we can come up with is a drum full of cement and radioactive waste or a thick walled shielded container generally forged using an intensive amount of energy.
I wish we were further along than the concept of burying the waste in a hole. The Geological Disposal Facility (GDF) in the UK has been talked about for years and like the practical and sustained capture of nuclear fusion is nowhere near a reality. If it was, my job would be a whole easier. Instead we are having to plan for long term above ground storage. While Scotland has a clear Near Surface Disposal policy in place, there is no political will to enact it.